AA cannons

[themousemaster]

Phlebotinum! Haven't seen that word used in a while

You come across it every so often while rummaging around the TV Tropes Wiki. It sounds better than "Handwavium".

But as long as we are playing Warzone, "Explodium" may be the better choice.

I agree that lasers take up where MGs leave off in the anti-cyborg tree. Thing is, with, say, rockets and cannons, all those upgrades you've been researching through the game keep applying to new generations of weapons. With MG's, all those MG researches taper off once the AG stops being useful... which is right around Gamma5 (2.0.10) / Gamma2 (2.1.X), or the point at which Pythons or a 3rd-level-cyborg-armor-research (Skirm/MP) comes into play. Cannons and Rockets don't taper off under mid-T3 (when Gauss and Scourge show up), and even then you TK's and HC's aren't rendered "immediately useless" due to a couple armor upgrades.

Oh... I see, the AG, although quite awesome, finds it's bullets bouncing off of upgraded armor. The thing I saw when I once tried to use AGs in one of the later Beta missions. The pre-DepletedUranium bullets were almost entirely ineffectual against the Collective's Heavy Cannon Tigers.

But the DU-armed AGs own Gamma. It's good to see them tapering off by Gamma 2 in 2.1.x, since I'd like the Flashlight to be more useful. Lasers are just cooler. As for tech upgrades, the Needle->RailGun->Gauss family of Mass Driver weapons doesn't benefit from the LC->MC->HC->HPV family of Cannon weapons, and the Scourge/Angel/Archie also use "Missile" upgrades which are separate from the "Rocket" upgrades used by the Lancer/TK/Ripple Rockets.

Which is true, but even after Gauss and Scourge has outpaced TK and HC (and in 2.1.X, that won't be until the very last stage for the scourge), the HCs and TKs are still not useless. All machinegun weapons are... and hence, all research relating to them is as well.

I never even knew that cyborgs had armor. I've never used cyborgs since I'm not a zerg-style person, and prefer fewer and more powerful units. As far as I've seen, cannon-armed tanks kill cyborgs quickly, machine gun tanks kill them even more quickly, artillery weapons kill them in groups, and VTOL bombs massacre them. So I've stayed away from 'em.

Yeah, they get armor upgrades. As far as them being useful... they are in MP. SP, not really. It's kind of lame when a weapon that is specifically designed to kill cyborgs... can't, because they have 3 levels of armor upgrades (and the nerf to AG in 2.1.X). Play a Cyborg-user in MP like you would a Zerg in Starcraft, and they are quite effective... And the SuperCyborgs late in the MP tree aren't bad either.

[Zarel]

I never even knew that cyborgs had armor. I've never used cyborgs since I'm not a zerg-style person, and prefer fewer and more powerful units. As far as I've seen, cannon-armed tanks kill cyborgs quickly, machine gun tanks kill them even more quickly, artillery weapons kill them in groups, and VTOL bombs massacre them. So I've stayed away from 'em.

Everything in Warzone that can be destroyed has armor. Everything a player can build (i.e. everything except features) has upgradable armor, either: Reinforced Base Structure Materials, Improved Hardcrete, Composite Alloys, or Cyborg Composite Alloys

[psychopompos]

I'd prefer it if the Angel and Archangel were indirect-homing.

same here, for simple realism.

check out Command&Conquer Tiberium Sun pre-patch; the Nod Artillery (Westwood realized what exactly was happening and very quickly patched the "homing" aspect out of that gun)

someone at westwood did their research!

Or, in other words, let me detail explicitly how all games would go: All teams will bunker themselves into the main base, using light units to try and take and hold oil derricks, while doing nothing more than teching up to Angelfire Missiles.

which is why i am keen to see thel/mthel & other arty countermeasures that kill incoming arty rockets & rounds.
with m/thel deployed in the field & thel emplacments at base, naff all of the arty fire would get through, wz gets current tech added to its futuristic theme, balance is maintained.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6nm-6eCzMCIWS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LThD0FMvTFUMTHEL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoKG26OIO_wACTIVE DEFENCES

As it is *right now*, the angelfire batteries have a role in the game, and are effective in that role (pulverizing slow-moving heavy units and base structures). Changing them from Unguided rockets into guided ones would throw a number of pre-established balance aspects out the window.

lancer & tank killer spammage?(frighteningly effective weaps in campaign anyway)

I would say that, if you really want a long-range, guided, anti-vehicle artillery piece, make it a new weapon type, multiplayer only (just like plasma cannons or the Satellite Uplink), and balance them from there. And to be SURE, make them have pre-reqs outside the Rocketeering tree

by the time your through t2 half your weaps are supposed to be guided to some degree, even the cannon rounds.
laser guided fin stabalised rocket propelled = target tracking...
to be realistic, the rocket & cannon teck should be more heavily linked anyway...

I agree that lasers take up where MGs leave off in the anti-cyborg tree.

something that makes me cringe... lasers will never be effective weaps irl! ever... what your talking is particle beam weapons...
i would use the needle gun to upgrade the mg(its a small mass driver innit?)

The pre-DepletedUranium bullets were almost entirely ineffectual against the Collective's Heavy Cannon Tigers.

good.
also
why are you shooting a heavy tank with a machine gun?

[Skrim]

something that makes me cringe... lasers will never be effective weaps irl! ever... what your talking is particle beam weapons...
i would use the needle gun to upgrade the mg(its a small mass driver innit?)

I would use Needle-esque small mass drivers on a 6-barrel Gatling mount to replace MGs. That solves the cooling problem to an extent.

Lasers are not effective weapons down in the dirt of ground combat. But they can be used to shoot down ballistic missiles(YAL-1 Airborne Laser) and artillery shells(THEL/M-THEL). They could be used against aircraft in an advanced form, and maybe against spacecraft in a much more advanced form. Against a tank, a laser would be just about useless and very easily stopped(smokescreen). The WZ2100 LasSat is unrealistic for attacking ground targets, but could be used to shoot down ballistic missiles, as was there original purpose.

Particle beams would never work in the atmosphere. Electrostatic repulsion already gives them a range problem, and an atmosphere would make things worse. They'd suffer from all the problems lasers suffer from, and more. Cooling problems, beam-focusing problems, refraction problems, blooming problems etc.

In space combat though, particle beams would be damn awesome as close-range weapons, especially if they used some kind of charged nanoparticles to extend their range. They do have a disadvantage, though, in that they can be deflected by an electromagnetic field, or maybe even be hit by a defensive beam.

good.
also
why are you shooting a heavy tank with a machine gun?

I was testing how well the Assault Guns work in Beta, since in Gamma they chewed up anything they came across. They were fine against cyborgs, obviously, but not much else. VTOLs with Phosphor Bombs did a better job of taking out cyborgs anyway, and Heavy Cannon tanks were good against everything else.

[Skrim]

Everything in Warzone that can be destroyed has armor. Everything a player can build (i.e. everything except features) has upgradable armor, either: Reinforced Base Structure Materials, Improved Hardcrete, Composite Alloys, or Cyborg Composite Alloys

Even the trees and huts and wrecked cars have armor? Wow.

[themousemaster]

lancer & tank killer spammage?(frighteningly effective weaps in campaign anyway)

I'll just respond to this line ;p.

In SP, they are effective because the game's SP AI is ditzy. Lancer's / TKs are good stuff to be sure; their problem is low body points and long reload times. If the CPU knew how to counter this, then an all-rocket army would get slaughtered.



If you want to deal with mass rockets, the trick is to figure out what platform the opponent is using them on, and counter as such:

Light bodies / hover: Cyborg spam.
Medium bodies: sacrifical front-unit to draw fire (like, MG-bug style cheap), followed up by fast, high-output weapons of your own (hover rocket/cannon mix is good)
Heavy bodies: High Explosives (long-range artillery or repeated VTOL strikes). mix in some cyborg spam as well, not so much for damage, but just to clog up the driving lanes and slow own the already excessively slow vehicles.

[psychopompos]

Lasers are not effective weapons down in the dirt of ground combat. But they can be used to shoot down ballistic missiles(YAL-1 Airborne Laser) and artillery shells(THEL/M-THEL).

they make th fuel or payload explode.
the round is killed from the inside out, but against an armoured vehicle flying or otherwise, useless.
not only that, but the effective frequencies for a laser weaps would be invisable to humans anyway

They could be used against aircraft in an advanced form, and maybe against spacecraft in a much more advanced form. Against a tank, a laser would be just about useless and very easily stopped(smokescreen). The WZ2100 LasSat is unrealistic for attacking ground targets, but could be used to shoot down ballistic missiles, as was there original purpose.

'fraid not...
disipation of heat would be too much for the comparitvly low level of energy in the weapon against a larger craft.
the laws of physics are at play on that one...

Particle beams would never work in the atmosphere. Electrostatic repulsion already gives them a range problem, and an atmosphere would make things worse. They'd suffer from all the problems lasers suffer from, and more. Cooling problems, beam-focusing problems, refraction problems, blooming problems etc.

lightning
also, i stream of iron filings going at mach4+ will rip things up.
ant they would still be far better than "lasers".

In space combat though, particle beams would be damn awesome as close-range weapons, especially if they used some kind of charged nanoparticles to extend their range. They do have a disadvantage, though, in that they can be deflected by an electromagnetic field, or maybe even be hit by a defensive beam.

you would need to be hella accurate to do that though

I was testing how well the Assault Guns work in Beta, since in Gamma they chewed up anything they came across. They were fine against cyborgs, obviously, but not much else. VTOLs with Phosphor Bombs did a better job of taking out cyborgs anyway, and Heavy Cannon tanks were good against everything else.

ah, fair one.

not so much for damage, but just to clog up the driving lanes and slow own the already excessively slow vehicles.

i kill them last
AI never turns off formation speed limiting.
i personally wish formation speed limiting was per unit rather than global.

[Skrim]

'fraid not...
disipation of heat would be too much for the comparitvly low level of energy in the weapon against a larger craft.
the laws of physics are at play on that one...

Most modern aircraft(not including helicopters and the A-10) are unarmored. They carry fuel in under-wing tanks and in the wings. A good long laser burst can ignite this fuel. You'd just need a significantly powerful laser, and you'd need to be sufficiently accurate.

Of course they would be invisible. Lasers in games are just visible because they have to be cool.

also, i stream of iron filings going at mach4+ will rip things up.
ant they would still be far better than "lasers".

A stream of Mach 4+ iron filings would be a mass driver weapon shooting thousands of very small projectiles. That's not a particle beam.

Electrolasers are a cool idea though, the closest you can get to a lightning weapon. Use a powerful laser to ionize the channel of air between you and the target into plasma, and then send electric current down that plasma stream to shock the target, frying electronics and causing thermal damage. You could call that a particle beam or a plasma cannon or whatever.

Technically, lasers are also "particle" beams. They just shoot photons instead of electrons or other massive particles.

you would need to be hella accurate to do that though

Yes.

[psychopompos]

Most modern aircraft(not including helicopters and the A-10) are unarmored. They carry fuel in under-wing tanks and in the wings. A good long laser burst can ignite this fuel. You'd just need a significantly powerful laser, and you'd need to be sufficiently accurate.

Of course they would be invisible. Lasers in games are just visible because they have to be cool.

even with out being "armored" many civi' airliners have tougher skins that most missiles, not to mention more space to protect the fuel from outside heat sources.
though that is likely to change on larger missiles now as they are redesigned with armor/insulation to defend them from this threat.

not to mention heat dissapation you get with the larger mass.
also, the recent gen of american & russian fighters are armored.
as where many order planes.
the american corsair from ww2 was armoured, though cant put names to many others.

A stream of Mach 4+ iron filings would be a mass driver weapon shooting thousands of very small projectiles. That's not a particle beam.

didnt say it would be a beam weapon
but much closer to the point.
break those filings down to atoms, energise them, and accellerate to near light speed & you do have a beam weapon.

Electrolasers are a cool idea though, the closest you can get to a lightning weapon. Use a powerful laser to ionize the channel of air between you and the target into plasma, and then send electric current down that plasma stream to shock the target, frying electronics and causing thermal damage. You could call that a particle beam or a plasma cannon or whatever.

always wantes to see the effect of concussion weapons.
a short sharp burst of powerful transverse waves to liquefy the pilots sounds like an effective way to terrify an enemy into surrender

Technically, lasers are also "particle" beams. They just shoot photons instead of electrons or other massive particles.

photons just dont have the energy/mass

[lav_coyote25]

all i can say to that is - stick your hand in front of the new generation of lasers... see what happens and get back to us... xD

[psychopompos]

all i can say to that is - stick your hand in front of the new generation of lasers... see what happens and get back to us... xD

im not made of dense conductive alloy :mad;
meat cooks & goes bye bye well before 1300c(around the melting point of untreated steel.) and is not particularly conductive.
metal is conductive, the heat will desapate.

not to mention, i bont feel like sitting in from of x-rays or gamma rays for other reasons along side the cooking.
which wouldnt do anything substantial to any kind of armour, not to mention that whe du armour plate, the radiation will get stopped too.

at high enough speed, the damage a particle beam inflicts, is essentially a small, sustained nuclear explosion, on the surface of what it is hitting.

idea!
what would a need to do, to make a mod that made the lasers in game start at red & move through the spectrum to purple as they got upgraded?
though, it could be funny to remove the visual element all together, maybe have some steam come from the turret

[TVR]

Considering Warzone 2100 VTOL ground-attack aircraft fly at extremely low altitudes, it wouldn't be surprising an anti-tank pulse LASER could inflict damage by vaporisation.

[Skrim]

Low altitudes make things worse for lasers. Blooming rates are higher, effective range is shorter, more energy is wasted, and dust, smoke, and weather can weaken the beam. I wouldn't like to be using a laser in a burning oil field, or a raging snowstorm, or if the tank I'm targeting just puts up a simple smokescreen(they already have this ability, BTW). The energy required to vaporize the tank's armor is more than what is practical, since such a laser would have extreme cooling problems and would lose effectiveness dramatically with distance. A Gauss Cannon or Rail Gun would just be a better idea if you're trying to kill a tank.

[themousemaster]

Low altitudes make things worse for lasers. Blooming rates are higher, effective range is shorter, more energy is wasted, and dust, smoke, and weather can weaken the beam. I wouldn't like to be using a laser in a burning oil field, or a raging snowstorm, or if the tank I'm targeting just puts up a simple smokescreen(they already have this ability, BTW). The energy required to vaporize the tank's armor is more than what is practical, since such a laser would have extreme cooling problems and would lose effectiveness dramatically with distance. A Gauss Cannon or Rail Gun would just be a better idea if you're trying to kill a tank.

Just in theory, but... if you are using heat to "destroy" a vehicle of any type, isn't the idea less to vaporize the armor, and more to turn the vehicle into an oven to cook the pilot?



*edit: This is sort of getting off-topic of the lameness of "AA cannons" a bit

[Skrim]

Just in theory, but... if you are using heat to "destroy" a vehicle of any type, isn't the idea less to vaporize the armor, and more to turn the vehicle into an oven to cook the pilot?

Heat dispersion. If you can't actually get rid of parts of your target, it'll just cool off and you're back to square one.

Missiles are downed by lasers because lasers ignite their fuel supply and cause them to go kaboom, which is possible because missiles are thin-skinned and carry a lot of vulnerable and highly volatile fuel. Mortar shells are detonated mid-air by the THEL, by causing the warhead to go off without hitting anything. Even in those cases, countermeasures would not be too difficult to devise, it's just that no one has done so yet.

This same idea won't work on a vehicle, unless you're so accurate that you hit an unarmored fuel tank and home on it long enough to ignite it.

As for the original topic, that died a long time ago.